News

Addressing disadvantage is no identity game

Thursday 3 November, 2011

Given that the dust has settled (to some degree) on the Bolt case, I thought it appropriate to move on and explore the important issue of the greater disadvantage suffered by some Aboriginal people, and what part Aboriginal identity might play.

While some see the court's decision on the Bolt case as a major victory for Aboriginal Australians, there seems to be many of them not sharing in that victory. Those Aboriginal Australians not sharing the victory are most likely living in impoverished communities with little real chance at attaining a standard of living most take for granted. Why is it that only some Aboriginal Australians are disadvantaged compared to the general population? It would seem that a person is generally not poorer, sicker, more disadvantaged, etc, simply because they are Aboriginal. So, perhaps when addressing the problem of disadvantage and searching for a solution, it may be better to consider the degree of disadvantage as the primary factor, and consider one's Aboriginal identity as a secondary factor.

The notion of Aboriginal identity plays a significant role in Aboriginal affairs in this country. There is disagreement over who is, and who is not Aboriginal. People have a right to decide for themselves whether or not they will identify as an Aboriginal Australian; nobody else should determine it for them. However, while identification as an Aboriginal Australian is a matter for individuals to decide for themselves, the way in which we allocate funds and resources to helping those Aboriginal people who are most disadvantaged is a matter of public concern. Therefore discussions on how best to close the gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians is everyone's business and should be discussed openly.

Those Aboriginal Australians who are most disadvantaged are more likely to be those who are unable to access jobs either because there is a shortage of jobs where they live, or because they lack the education, skills, and qualifications necessary to compete for those jobs, or both. People with good jobs are more likely to have an adequate income enabling them to access primary health care services, and are more likely to feel good about themselves because their employment allows them to make a valuable contribution to the society in which they live. And when people feel good about themselves, they are less likely to engage in dysfunctional and self-defeating behaviours. Sadly, in place of real jobs, some leaders are urging Aboriginal people to collect mining royalties and welfare cheques as a means of living and feeling good about themselves.

Addressing employment issues, particularly in remote parts of Australia, is a very difficult problem which is perhaps why many prefer to get distracted with side issues, such as the desire to modify the constitution, changing the date of Australia Day, etc. Once identifying the lack of access to jobs as a cause for why many Aboriginal people are greatly disadvantaged, we can then proceed to discuss solutions. In summary, a solution entails creating jobs close to where the people are, or if this is not economically sustainable, then providing an exit strategy so that people can relocate to where the jobs are. Of course this needs to be paralleled with a strategy to increase school participation and completion. It has been shown many times in this country, that where Aboriginal people have opportunities for meaningful employment, they are outstanding contributors to their communities.

When discussing solutions, there is a pervasive belief and practice amongst opinion leaders, activists, and policymakers, that Aboriginal Australians are the most appropriate for helping fellow Aboriginal Australians. But the notion of "only Aboriginal people can fully understand and assist other Aboriginal people," much like the notion of "I was raised Aboriginal" is ambiguous and goes unchallenged for fear of the consequences for challenging it. I believe it should be challenged, in our quest to address the problems facing Aboriginal people. Those promoting the view that Aboriginal people are the best ones for identifying the problems facing Aboriginal people and recommending solutions is largely based on the questionable views that only Aboriginal people can understand Aboriginal people, and that those in need of assistance only wish to accept it from other Aboriginal people. There is no shortage in this country of examples where Aboriginal people have greatly benefited from services provided by non-Aboriginal people, and vice versa. This is simply Australians helping fellow Australians.

Does identification as an Aboriginal person necessarily mean that one is better qualified for helping other Aboriginal people? Even when Aboriginal Australians discuss these matters, there is much disagreement amongst them about the problems they face and the associated solutions, making it difficult to choose and implement a solution. This is normal for any group of people. It is a fallacy that people identifying as belonging to one race of people will be in agreement simply because they belong to that race. The media is full of accounts where Aboriginal leaders disagree with one another, sometimes to the point where personal attacks are made. In one sense this is good (the disagreements, not the attacks) as it clearly demonstrates that Aboriginal people themselves are divided on how best to address the disadvantage. Therefore, it is ludicrous to suggest that Aboriginal people are best placed to make decisions on how to reduce the gap simply because they are Aboriginal. Aboriginal identity should not become an impediment to searching for good solutions to the problems facing many members of the Aboriginal community.

I should add that I have met some brilliant Australians who identify as Aboriginal, and are doing much to close the gap. However, it is not there Aboriginal status that enables them to make a positive difference; it is their ability to identify the underlying causes of problems, understand people, look beyond their own egoistic needs, and respond accordingly. Their potential for success at making a difference is determined more by their "competency" and "character" than by their "colour". Perhaps by focusing on these first two criteria when addressing the needs of those most disadvantaged in society (both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal alike), disputes regarding Aboriginal identify will be less of an issue. People can still be proud to declare their Aboriginal identity, but the efforts of individuals, families, communities, and governments can be better focussed on closing the gap, and not playing politics.

Tad 05 Dec 2011 5:18:05pm
Anthony your arguments are not persuasive enough to win me over. You make a statement but refuse to back it up with facts. For instance, I do not know of one Aboriginal leader who tells their community to collect mining royalties and welfare to make them-selves happy. Could you please enlighten us were this practice takes place. You go on to talk about how leaders attack each other for their own egotistic needs then follow up and attack the people who wish to see constitutional change. Just so you get this clear it is their legal right to seek constitutional change. I don’t necessarily agree with what they have come up with but it is their legal right to seek change. And guess what Anthony I will have a vote to say yes or no a right that did not exist for so many Aboriginal until the late 60’s. To say that it is total ludicrous that Aboriginal people are best placed to help Aboriginal people because of their cultural grouping is a ludicrous statement within itself because it undermines your entire argument Anthony.

Anthony 22 Nov 2011 4:56:55pm
@Tad. I find your belief that it is the past that is responsible for the problems we see today, troublesome. It is very interesting, that despite a common past for Aborignal people, while many of them are not doing so well, many are doing exceedingly well. Such an observation would suggest that it is not the past that explains the disadvanated we see today. If it was, all Aboriginal people would be disadvantaged. Those who are doing well, simply do not let the past be an excuse for them.

Tad 06 Dec 2011 5:53:37am
Anthony if you are trying to be Andrew bolt or twiggy forrest or an apologist for themdon't be. what is in this Article is convoluted and contradictory therefore it makes no sense.I want to know who these alledged leaders are who want Aboriginal people to accept mining royalties as a another form welfare. My point is simple do not make a statement without some facts to back it up

Tad 17 Nov 2011 12:56:24pm
While I like the fact that you are willing to throw thoughts out there for people to either agree or disagree.I find your lack historical referencing troublesome. the current situation has been bought about by 221 years of Bureaucratic bungling by non Indigenous folk. your oversimplification of the issue may resonate with some but does not address the issue that the current situation has been bought about by the non Indigenous folk. And the Indigenous folk have had to live with its consequences.

Anthony Dillon 13 Jan 2012 4:04:50pm
Tad, your reference to "historical referencing" certainly does not resonate with me. I believe it is the dwelling on the past that largely contributes to the problems facing the Indigenous community today. I stress, it is not the past, but the dwelling on the past that is the problem. If it was the past (and I think you are referring to colonisation), then why is it that there are so many Aboriginal people who are doing very well? The problems we see today, I do not believe are due to "221 years of Bureaucratic bungling." Again, if that was the cause of problems, then we have to ask why the 'bungling' has not held every Indigenous person back.

robbigee 03 Feb 2012 12:28:28pm
To extend on the issue of Identity, has anyone read the paper 'Aboriginality and Identity' commissioned by the AECG? I hate to think of the difficulties many Aboriginal people will have if the recommendations are implemented.

When you say that "while many of them are not doing so well, many are doing exceedingly well," what do you mean by "many"? Are there some figures you are basing that on? Because I have not heard that many are doing well at all in anything I have read on the subject, or by the indicators that HREOC use. I have heard that things are getting better, but I have not heard that "many" are doing well. I am just genuinely interested in this, and hope it is true.